It's easy for hackles to rise when considering pay hikes for public servants, but the time has come for Denver's top managers to be paid more money.Eleven officials who are appointed by the mayor and whose pay is set by charter haven't received increases in six years. Over that same time, city workers have received an average 3.27 percent raise each year.A proposal by Mayor ...

Public service used to mean just that....service. I have a problem with people who are appointed to government positions...we know these appointments are political favors and any pay raise they receive will be at the taxpayers expense. If they want private sector-comparable salaries, then they should work in the private sector.

The current city attorney's salary of $141,284 is below the pay range for attorneys set by the city's Human Resources Department and below what other city attorneys make in smaller municipalities.

Let them move to those other municipalities. What those cities are willing to pay means nothing in Denver. They don't have the "status" of working in Denver.

The bill lifts the salary to $190,000 - a 34.5 percent boost.

Quite a jump. I don't know of anyone below a corporate CEO that has that sort of jump.

Didn't you pay attention to your own survey? Over 80% of your readership said this:

NO INCREASE IN PAY!

You didn't like the peoples' choice for A64. Now you don't like this choice. Too bad. You sound just the like the candidates at last night debates: "The people have approved things we don't like and we're not going to support them."

YGTBSM! The Obama administration just announced (via the SECDEF) that our troops will get a whopping 1% raise....senior officers' pay will be frozen. Is Denver having a hard time filling these city jobs? Not! Colorado's governor makes $90,000/year city. What person thinks Denver's bureaucrats deserve twice that much? Gives new meaning to the terms "minimum wage" and "income inequality". Gotta love those frugal Dems.

Let's take bids. With the numbers of unemployed, and people who have switched careers, I'm sure we can find some takers out there. It's just going to be an endless cycle of raising salaries, one upping the other city. How so many cities, like those in California, have gotten into trouble. You're not just raising salaries, but retirement costs/pensions as well. I guess we'll just pretend we don't have a budget problem just because we passed a tax that gave us some leeway.

mxer wrote:The best and brightest will never go to government positions.

I think it doesn't have to do with salary as much as dealing with a bureaucratic mess that is entrenched. The best and the brightest usually want to steer clear of politics as well. They want to accomplish things because they feel rewarded by that. Hard to accomplish things nowadays in government. It's not as exciting to tell someone you're working for the city, when you can tell them you have your own consulting firm or business. Nobody wants to be stuck there. Who wants to be told what to do by people who know nothing, like Debbie Ortega and Paul Lopez? Charlie Brown got his degree in public something or other so he could eat at the trough for years.

It is a disturbing notion that the answer to every public policy problem, real or perceived (in this case cabinet head salaries) is more money for government, less for tax payers. I think the prudent thing to do is to enact an across the board budget reduction for all the city agencies overseen by these mangers, and use that freed up money for the pay raises . Anything left over can be refunded to Denver taxpayers.

buff driver wrote:YGTBSM! The Obama administration just announced (via the SECDEF) that our troops will get a whopping 1% raise....senior officers' pay will be frozen. Is Denver having a hard time filling these city jobs? Not! Colorado's governor makes $90,000/year city. What person thinks Denver's bureaucrats deserve twice that much? Gives new meaning to the terms "minimum wage" and "income inequality". Gotta love those frugal Dems.

The Governor of Wyoming which has a 9 times fewer population receives $105,000 in salary. Their Attorney General receives $137,000. Even their State Treasurer and Secratary of State receive more than our Governor. Gotta love those "frugal" Republicans. On the other hand if you want top people running the state/city you want to pay them well. City Attorneys can go just about anyplace else and earn into the millions so be thankful they don't demand more. At least accept the consequences of not paying them well.

As soon as the officials in question can show where, in the last 6 years, they or their office that they run have done something significant and positive for the city then we can discuss an increased compensation. I can't imagine demanding increased compensation from my boss for maintaining the status quo or by simply doing my job per my job description and neither should these folks. Shame on the DP editorial board for proposing such an idea. Hey DP, it sure is easy to spend the taxpayers money isn't it? No wonder we all know which way you guys lean politically.

Oh and by positive and significant does not mean you developed yet another layer of bureaucracy in an already bloated city Government or you created yet another social program designed to benefit only those who would do nothing at the expense of those who choose to work hard and be successful. Truthfully the only way these guys, the mayor included, deserve a pay increase vs a pay cut is if they could show where they have cut spending and passed that savings onto the taxpayer. We all know that's a pipe dream don't we?

As long as the City and County of Denver attracts and gets......highly qualified.......individuals at the pay scale they are currently being paid......WHY should Denver pay more?

The ONLY reason Denver should pay more.......is to attract More Qualified Individuals......to replace any Lower Quality Buffoons who currently hold office.

If The Denver Post......is suggesting......that certain positions should pay more......to attract better qualified people.......because those who currently hold those positions......are grossly incompetent......and should be replaced by the higher quality of people a higher salary would attract.......then The Denver Post should not just beat around the bush.....but say so.

Otherwise......Denver is just following the standards of Jefferson County......because NONE of THEIR "topped out in pay" employees have received a pay raise in six years either.

It seems to me the Post is suggesting the people we have now are not up to standard. That's strange I don't read about the post taking these clowns to task every day or even week or even month or year.

buff driver wrote:YGTBSM! The Obama administration just announced (via the SECDEF) that our troops will get a whopping 1% raise....senior officers' pay will be frozen. Is Denver having a hard time filling these city jobs? Not! Colorado's governor makes $90,000/year city. What person thinks Denver's bureaucrats deserve twice that much? Gives new meaning to the terms "minimum wage" and "income inequality". Gotta love those frugal Dems.

The Governor of Wyoming which has a 9 times fewer population receives $105,000 in salary. Their Attorney General receives $137,000. Even their State Treasurer and Secratary of State receive more than our Governor. Gotta love those "frugal" Republicans. On the other hand if you want top people running the state/city you want to pay them well. City Attorneys can go just about anyplace else and earn into the millions so be thankful they don't demand more. At least accept the consequences of not paying them well.

Are you saying the people running the state right now aren't doing a good job? I was thinking the same thing.

You are dead wrong on this, DPEB. If these generous raises were for the rank and file, I would be all for it. But to give these yahoos such a huge raise is asinine.

On the other hand, I can understand that it is incredibly hard work for Lauri Dannemiller to steal parks all day long. It's also very difficult for Debra Johnson to deny legally gathered petitions just because she doesn't agree with them.